In the first place, let it be duly noted that there is no biblical justification for spiteful or malicious taunting of anybody, for any reason. But with that stated, and catalogued in the appropriate place, there is plenty of room for activities that will be called spiteful or malicious taunting. So let's look at whether there is any room for using gay jokes as a tool in the culture wars. For a sample, look at the previous post.

1. This kind of jab is should not be directed at anybody who acknowledges what the Bible teaches about human sexuality, and honestly struggles against homosexual temptation. It is directed at those who want to assume the role of the Deity as they seek achieve all the sexual potentialities of two or more lumps of PlayDough. So little time, so many positions . . .

Since every Christian struggles against sin, it is perverse to mock someone who struggles in their sanctification with a different area than you do. But it is not perverse to mock those who think they are God. Talk about not having a birth certificate.

2. Folly resisted is the lot of everyone who names the name of Christ. Folly embraced is a different deal. The fact that sin results in heartache does not mean that such sin, when embraced, should not be laughed at.

Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? Those who tarry long over wine; those who go to try mixed wine. Do not look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. In the end it bites like a serpent and stings like an adder. Your eyes will see strange things, and your heart utter perverse things. You will be like one who lies down in the midst of the sea, like one who lies on the top of a mast.“They struck me,” you will say, “but I was not hurt; they beat me, but I did not feel it. When shall I awake? I must have another drink” (Prov. 23:29-35, ESV).

What causes more heartache than alcoholism? What has wrecked more homes that the bottle? So where does this writer get off making fun of people who get so hammered that they can't remember anything about it, and then when they wake up they think this means they are supposed to get another drink? He must not have known anyone who has struggled with this particular temp . . . oh, it's in the Bible? Never mind.

3. The howls of outrage that occur whenever somebody does this kind of thing means that somebody really ought to investigate whether we should be doing it more. The central problem with sodomy is not the "what goes where" problem, but is rather the self-importance of those who want to relegate to themselves the authority to define the world. That kind of self-importance must always be dealt with accordingly. Someone buys a coffee maker, and takes it home and tries to use it as a sewing machine. That's just sad. But suppose that person doing this won't leave off lecturing you for being a red state idiot, one who must have some deep seated phobias about sewing. At some point, a descriptive phrase is in order. And once you have delivered that phrase, if you are not accused of being full of hate, then you just weren't trying.

4. Once you adopt the posture that this kind of rebuke is counterproductive in our attempts to win homosexuals evangelistically, because this kind of thing is "offensive" to them, then guess what? Now a bunch of things will suddenly be offensive to them. If your personal goal is to stay off their lists of people contributing to hate speech, they've got you, friend. They publish those lists. The Southern Poverty Law Center just recently listed the Family Research Council as a hate group because of their stand against homosexuality. And I will dare to go out on a limb and say that, with regard to their published materials, the Family Research Council is not capable of making a gay joke. Honestly, do you think they would ask their readers why Episcopalians can't play chess anymore? And supply the answer that they can't tell the difference between a bishop and a queen? How likely do you think that is?

5. And last, before the sodomy lobby took up the task of defining the human race' five-fold sexualities (with new developments sure to follow), they had previously taken up the task of defining acceptable discourse about sexuality. But I don't want to give them control of the lexicon of acceptable words, control of the time clock, control of the buzzer, and then try to debate them. Do I look stupid?

Now the fundamental rule of this egalitarian discourse of theirs is that generalizations are malicious and unfair, and that anybody who uses them is just simmering with hatred. Of course, the only reason they hate generalization is that they are all Cretans, and Cretans are evil beasts, lazy gluttons, and liars.

Seriously, if you make a joke about effeminacy, someone will rush up to tell you that some homosexuals are quite manly. Well, duh. Generalizations are generalizations, after all, but the pomosexual reality they are trying to contruct still loathes them.

Generalizations are despised by them because the generalizers are so secure about the differences that God has embedded in the world that they just throw statements out there -- like the fact that Canada is north of the United States, even though parts of Canada are south of parts of the United States. Men are taller than women, even though some women are taller than some men. Do I deny it? Not at all, and yet I persist in saying that men are taller than women. I also persist in saying that men are better at math, and women are better at nursing babies. You see, I am incorrigible.

Gay jokes depend on sexual generalizations, and as such, they are an essential part of our defense of the way God made the sexual world.

Share the goodness

Comments

Who less than a Calvinist?

ericengerbretson (Registered) 2010-12-19 23:59:54

The Bible states clearly that one cannot become a Christian unless the Spirit grants it. Calvinists believe salvation is 100% a gift, right? And that basically, *everything* is a gift from God-- including one's intellect, upbringing, wisdom, nature, nurture… all of it, right? And I believe, Calvinists are fond of the quote "there but for the grace of God go I."

So… would a Christian mock and make jokes about a blind person for being blind, or a cripple for being crippled? No. What about a mocking a stupid person for being stupid? What about a person proud of being stupid? Is it funny that God didn't gift him with a higher intellect or better parents? Should a Christian make jokes about a sinner steeped in folly who is racing on his way to hell? Which part is funnier-- that the Spirit has chosen to leave him blind to his sin, or that he will burn in hell? Is it funny that God decided to gift the Christian with witty jocularity but not the fool?

The reason there ...

Who less than a Calvinist (cont.)

ericengerbretson (Registered) 2010-12-20 00:03:25

...are so many people proud of their sin and in rebellion against God is because of original sin-- Sin with a capital "S". That Sin includes all of my sins. So, a tiny part, but a part indeed, of the reason that a gay is gay and proud of it-- is my sin! How can I make a joke out of something that I partly caused? How can I make a joke out of someone's trip to hell? How can I laugh at someone for not receiving the gift of salvation that I was given? Do I laugh at the kid in Sudan who didn't get as cool of a Christmas present as me??!! I guess I can understand a Christian who believes that his salvation is partly a work of his own laughing at sinners for their folly. But who on earth should mock others less than someone who believes all he has is a gift?! And as for someone who has a chemical imbalance, or was raised in an imbalanced home, and hasn't been given the gift of understanding his plight-- who should mock him less than a Calvinist?? Someday, when I am comp...

Who less than a Calvinist (cont...)

ericengerbretson (Registered) 2010-12-20 00:08:56

Someday, when I am completely living out all the commands of God in Scripture, then I may feel ready to work on the evangelical merits of mocking others. But, while it may only show my immaturity, I somehow still feel guilty when I mock the ungifted.

I suppose I could, at the finish line, mock someone for running the mile more slowly than I do... but it might smack of poor taste.

Yes, but....

Carson D. Spratt (Registered) 2010-12-20 18:38:13

Your posited situation is unrealistic. You make it sound as if everybody got issued an identity at birth, and some got straight, some got gay, and both were stuck, like it or not. If that were so, maybe we couldn't make jokes. But sodomites grasp their sin with two greedy hands. They aren't trying to get away from it. They don't even know that it IS sin. They insist that the excrement they're clutching is really the finest gold, and we just can't see it. In this case, with stubborn, blind, and evil men who insist on their lies, isn't making a joke at their expense the best thing we can do? It seems like the most loving thing which might open their eyes. If it doesn't work this way, at least our prods will show the mere absurdity of pretending that you are what you aren't. They are being ridiculous: when we slam them with humour, we are treating their ridiculousness as it was meant to be treated.

robsteele (Registered) 2010-12-21 17:10:46

A dishonest painter stole paint from customers and diluted what he didn't steel with turpentine. One night an angel of the Lord appeared to him in glory and thundered "Repaint you thinner!"

robsteele (Registered) 2010-12-21 17:12:21

A dishonest painter stole paint from customers and diluted what he didn't steal with turpentine. One night an angel of the Lord appeared to him in glory and thundered "Repaint you thinner!"

Missing the point

zackskrip (Registered) 2010-12-21 17:52:29

D. Wilson isn't interested in personally condemning a homosexual who is struggling with his sin. His argument is that it is acceptable to use humor/sarcasm to paint absurd those things that truly are.

For instance, my town just passed a hands-free requirement for cell phones while driving. So now, instead of watching people hold their phones up to their ears when they drive, I now see them flip it open and hold it at their chest while they strain to use the speaker-phone feature. I personally like the law, because it means I can finally drink my coffee while talking on the phone during my drive home.

The point is not to crush or mock a particular homosexual, the point is to highlight the obvious and pull back the wool. This isn't evangelism, this is hermeneutics and epistemology.

robsteele (Registered) 2010-12-21 21:02:23

A dishonest house painter stole paint from customers and diluted what he didn't steal with turpentine. One night an angel of the Lord appeared to him in glory and thundered at him "Repaint you thinner!"